welshbairn Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Like many talking heads he's following the Katie Hopkins model of upping his fees by appearing "controversial". After leaving uni he claims to have spent an unspecified time as a "freelance archaeologist", usually code for being unemployed, before training as a journalist and reaching the heady heights of working on the BT corporate website. Even he admits he's no historian. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee-Bey Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 This the type of dogshit cultural marxism nonsense Oliver is into. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detournement Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 (edited) We should all remember that in the actual Cultural Revolution current planet earth boss President Xi got punted out to the countryside to grow rice and it didn't do him any harm. Neil Oliver and Toby Young would be fortunate to get such an opportunity to develop a historical materialism perspective while residing in a cave. Edited September 7, 2020 by Detournement 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 “Maoist Cultural Revolution” the planet is on fire you baldy c**t 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 I'm beginning to think that the entirety of 2020's political/cultural talking points began as jokes on 4chan. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Got sent a funny tweet about Matt Hancock earlier, then it backfired as I ended up utterly fucking seething about the c**t. He is the very worst of "privelege". Raging at the temerity of of someone questioning him or calling him out, knows he is protected but doesnt know how or why. Then I got to thinking, imagine the c***s that live in his constituency.... A majority of whom vote for that clammy little weasel. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Matt Hancock perpetually has the face of a husband in a cuckolding video 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Matt Hancock perpetually has the face of a husband in a cuckolding video Hes totally inappropriate for any public facing role. If you asked him to sell used cars for you, you would go out of business in a sea of scathing reviews. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GNU_Linux Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 I for one am utterly shocked Westminsters attitude to drug reform is a bit shit.https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-54048122A cross-party group of MPs has accused the UK government of the almost "wholesale rejection" of moves to tackle Scotland's record drug deaths.It comes after the Scottish Affairs Committee published a report in November calling for a radical re-think of current drugs policy.Their recommendations included decriminalising drugs for personal use and backing consumption rooms.However, the UK government has rejected most of the recommendations.They include calls to declare Scotland's record drug deaths - 1,187 in 2018 - a public health emergency.The UK government also said a recommendation to reform the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act and decriminalise drugs for personal use would not "eliminate the crime committed by the illicit trade, nor would it address the harms associated with drug dependence".They added: "There is a strong link between drugs and crime, which is why we reject the assertion that the Department for Health and Social Care should lead on drug misuse. We know that people who regularly use heroin, cocaine or crack cocaine are estimated to commit around 45% of all acquisitive crime."Since 2008 the Scottish government has treated drug misuse as a health issue rather than a criminal justice issue.On the idea of consumption rooms, the UK government responded that: "We want to do all we can to stop people having access to drugs that could ultimately kill them. No illegal drug-taking can be assumed to be safe and there is no safe way to take them."They added: "Our approach on drugs remains clear - we must prevent drug use in our communities, support people through treatment and recovery, and tackle the supply of illegal drugs."What are safe drug consumption facilities?Glasgow City Council has proposed allowing users to take their own drugs under the supervision of medical staff at a special facility in the city, but the idea has been blocked by the Home Office.Sometimes dubbed "fix rooms", the aim would be to encourage users who inject heroin or cocaine on Glasgow's streets to enter a safe and clean environment.It was hoped the scheme would encourage addicts into treatment, cut down on heroin needles on city streets and counter the spread of diseases such as HIV.Last week, a recovering heroin addict launched a drug consumption van in Glasgow despite warnings it could break the law.Peter Krykant said he hoped it would prevent overdoses and blood-borne viruses among drug users.The cross-party committee currently comprises chairman, SNP MP Pete Wishart, and includes five Conservatives, two Labour members, two Lib Dems and two other SNP MPs.Mr Wishart said this report, which was worked on by the committee when its membership was made up of MPs from the last parliament, was based on one of the most "extensive drugs inquiries in Scotland ever conducted".Following the government's response to the report, he said: "We are surprised and disappointed by the government's almost wholesale rejection of recommendations by a Westminster Select Committee after collecting a substantial body of evidence from people with lived experience, charities and academics, as well as legal, criminal justice and health professionals…few of these will find comfort in this response."He also accused the government of providing little evidence to support its stance and called for what evidence there was to be made available following of a drug summit in February.He added: "What is evident is there's little change in the government's drugs strategy despite the death rate in Scotland from problem drug use remaining stubbornly higher than any country in Europe."This fact itself should demonstrate that the current approach isn't working. This is undoubtedly a public health emergency."The governments' viewsAll UK drugs misuse legislation is currently reserved to Westminster.A spokesman for the Home Office said it was committed to preventing drug use, supporting people through treatment and recovery and tackling the supply of illegal drugs."We have no plans to introduce drug consumption rooms or decriminalise drugs. Illegal drugs devastate lives and communities, and dealers should face the full consequences of the law," he added."We are committed to tackling drug misuse and held a UK-wide drugs summit in Glasgow earlier this year to discuss the most effect ways to tackle drug misuse and their terrible impact across Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland."The Scottish government has said it welcomes support for the introduction of a safe drugs consumption room in Glasgow as part of efforts to reduce deaths there.A spokeswoman said when the report was published in November: "The outdated Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 should be amended to allow us to implement a range of public health focused responses, including the introduction of safe consumption facilities in Glasgow."We call on the incoming UK government to amend the Act or to devolve those powers to Scotland." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee-Bey Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Mind when the last Labour government sacked their top scientists because they didn't agree with their position on reclassification and in doing so torpedoed any chance of meaningful drug policy reform for a generation ? Good times. This is an area where Holyrood needs to be bolder. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 (edited) 16 hours ago, pandarilla said: I disagree with Oliver on many, many things - but he's clearly going through a pretty nasty time trying to deal with this. A few years ago he was doing very well, and generally an uncontroversial tv historian. Now he's openly abused and his views on anything and everything are dismissed by masses of people on social media. I listened to an excellent Adam Buxton interview today (his podcast series) discussing this very thing with a former editor of the new statesman. This woman had interviewed Jordan pieterson a while back and her and buxton were discussing the effects of these social media storms on people's lives. It's a horribly toxic thing to go through, and i genuinely don't think we've realised how damaging these things can be for individuals. I'd draw a line between the likes of Oliver and, presumably, Cathy Newman? Newman is a journalist. I don't think any journalists are really poltically 'neutral' but she's not some kind of 'activist journalist' like some are. It's ridiculous that she got piled on for the Petersen interview. Oliver's effectively a minor celebrity. Celbrities of all kinds can get their opinions to f**k, unless you're actually prpared to do something about it, like Marcus Rashford. Anything that discourages these idiots from spouting their opinions as if we should all be listening is fine with me. Edited September 7, 2020 by Gordon EF 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Can we stop calling TV presenter Neil Oliver a historian. He isn't I don't think he's a very good historian but to claim he isn't one at all is a bit churlish (no-one needs a 'show us your degrees' debate). He's fronted major historical documentary series for the bbc. I fully understand that he's not a 'qualified academic' - but he's very much a tv historian. The same applies to Andrew marr. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlion Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 16 hours ago, pandarilla said: Aye but this is all relatively recently is it not? He wasn't particularly political or controversial before. He came out as a no voter but was there anything after that? Fawning over racists and deciding to wade into the trans issue (stoutly against trans folks’ rights). Zero sympathy. Oliver obviously thought that cosying up to those he thought were mainstream (Starkey, Rowling) would keep his underserved and unfathomable profile riding high. I can’t see how you or anyone can sympathise with someone who set out to court a particular branch of people only to have it backfire when those he worshipped and tried to ally himself with on issues - and these are issues separate from independence - found themselves behind the times. If Oliver is struggling mentally - and I don’t know that he is - then it’s a result of his trying to manipulate public opinion on a range of controversial issues and losing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 I don't think he's a very good historian but to claim he isn't one at all is a bit churlish (no-one needs a 'show us your degrees' debate). The pecking order between qualified archeologist and qualified historian might mean nothing to me or you but it seems to mean something to them 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invergowrie arab Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 46 minutes ago, pandarilla said: I don't think he's a very good historian but to claim he isn't one at all is a bit churlish (no-one needs a 'show us your degrees' debate). He's fronted major historical documentary series for the bbc. I fully understand that he's not a 'qualified academic' - but he's very much a tv historian. The same applies to Andrew marr. Show us your degrees ( and your post-graduate qualifications and peer reviewed work) are literally how we decide who are historians and who aren't. I am increasingly of the view that your reasonable man fetish is some kind of trolling as nobody could possibly hold these opinions. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CambieBud Posted September 8, 2020 Share Posted September 8, 2020 If Neil Oliver wants to avoid online abuse then the 2 glaringly obvious solutions are:1. Don’t post anything moronic on twitter and2: come off social media. Simple really 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detournement Posted September 8, 2020 Share Posted September 8, 2020 22 hours ago, invergowrie arab said: Show us your degrees ( and your post-graduate qualifications and peer reviewed work) are literally how we decide who are historians and who aren't. There have always been historians without qualifications in history. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted September 8, 2020 Share Posted September 8, 2020 Show us your degrees ( and your post-graduate qualifications and peer reviewed work) are literally how we decide who are historians and who aren't. I am increasingly of the view that your reasonable man fetish is some kind of trolling as nobody could possibly hold these opinions.Oh do f**k off. The wee clique of posters who wander the forum dismissing alternative views and abusing folk for daring to disagree with them is large enough.It never fails to surprise me how much being 'reasonable' seems to annoy people on here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlion Posted September 8, 2020 Share Posted September 8, 2020 On 07/09/2020 at 17:03, invergowrie arab said: Show us your degrees ( and your post-graduate qualifications and peer reviewed work) are literally how we decide who are historians and who aren't. Not at the BBC it’s not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Steele Posted September 8, 2020 Share Posted September 8, 2020 I'm convinced that Oliver won't stop his inane bleatings until he gets what he most wants - a wee medal from the Queen. He'll see it as his reward for services to his beloved Union. Most other folk will see it as services to fuckwittery. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.